Results 1 to 29 of 29

Thread: Debate: Is Psychology a Science?

  1. #1
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Debate: Is Psychology a Science?

    The answer is already "yes" but go.


    @Singu

  2. #2
    Closer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,631
    Mentioned
    100 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe different fields of psychology have different tiers of scientific veracity because I believe that biopsychology has a firmer empirical basis than social psychology and cognitive psychology.

    Ultimately, I realize that even though we have more layers to peel in the more abstract forms of psychology, all forms of psychology are categorically scientific because they follow the scientific method and have a reachable basis of conclusion.
    "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; genius hits a target no one else can see." - Schopenhauer

  3. #3
    f.k.a Oprah sbbds's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    2,255
    Mentioned
    158 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yes, but a lot of forms of therapy/counseling are mostly not scientific, but “intuitive” and developed via experience.

  4. #4
    Landlady of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    Enlightened
    Posts
    16,595
    Mentioned
    324 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    Many of its claims are freudaulant, and it is highly abused by popular psychology via psychologists, journalists, and people on the internet who don't even have qualifications. But when it concerns actual published research, it is not so dismal.

  5. #5
    squark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    TIM
    1sx
    Posts
    3,023
    Mentioned
    254 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Subteigh View Post
    freudaulant
    heh, nice pun =)

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Psychology is not a science. Scientific concepts are generalizations about reality that have been abstracted from many concrete observations. They are useful for calling attention to aspects of personality and behavior that all people share.

    However; how each of these abstracted scientific concepts function in a specific individual's personality and behavior is unique and can never be codified in all encompassing scientific concept. It is subjective, not objective.

    As soon as you look as psychology as a science - you loose something and it put limits on the individual as not a unique/complex system. You must also have a subjective factor in psychology that is not present in hard scientific theories or laws.

  7. #7
    Kalinoche the Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    currently belgium
    Posts
    3,183
    Mentioned
    199 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    there are those who argue that even mathematics is not a science from an epistemology POV (as in the context is important)
    honest labor needs no master

    Nothing good is a miracle, nothing lovely is a dream.

    Επί πάντων μέμνησο τα έσχατά σου, και ου μη αμαρτήσης

  8. #8
    faith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    TIM
    SLE ESTp 7w8 sx/sp
    Posts
    100
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    When will people learn that not being scientific about something doesn't make it invalid........................................... .................................................. .................................................. ..............

  9. #9
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by faith View Post
    When will people learn that not being scientific about something doesn't make it invalid........................................... .................................................. .................................................. ..............
    Because some things are supposed to be scientific (e.g. psychology.)
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  10. #10
    faith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    TIM
    SLE ESTp 7w8 sx/sp
    Posts
    100
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum View Post
    Because some things are supposed to be scientific (e.g. psychology.)

    Using science limits the field of psychology because you have to address what you cannot measure to reach a full understanding of the human psyche periodt

  11. #11
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by faith View Post
    Using science limits the field of psychology because you have to address what you cannot measure to reach a full understanding of the human psyche periodt
    Can you ever fully prove anything to anyone besides yourself? And just because I want to study, say, religious belief, doesn't mean I have to drag in Jesus, Allah, and Buddha and do an EEG on them.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  12. #12
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The sensed world is the domain of science, and nothing in the sensed world attests to the existence of the mind. So no, psychology is not a science, unless you're talking about the branch of it that deals with observable behavior. That particular branch of psychology is really a form of physics, though. It doesn't deal with the mind at all, except in the same indirect way as all physics does.

  13. #13
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    The sensed world is the domain of science, and nothing in the sensed world attests to the existence of the mind. So no, psychology is not a science, unless you're talking about the branch of it that deals with observable behavior. That particular branch of psychology is really a form of physics, though. It doesn't deal with the mind at all, except in the same indirect way as all physics does.
    I can sense things which attest to the mind, and though that's mostly just me having refined perceptual abilities, if we were all blind, that wouldn't make light not exist, and science could still attest that. Now, the Cartesian dualist account of the mind is horribly misguided, but the eliminativist one, I can't describe more kindly than ridiculously stupid. If you're not aware now, what are you? Would you allow me to do whatever I want to you, torture and use you in whichever way I wish like a machine or doll? At least become an epiphenomenalist for your own sake (I'm not an epiphenomenalist, but I find epiphenomenalism among people who don't think much about the philosophy of mind defensible.)
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  14. #14
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalinoche the Child View Post
    there are those who argue that even mathematics is not a science from an epistemology POV (as in the context is important)
    Well, I would argue mathematics is not a science, but I would also argue mathematics falls so completely outside the domain of science it's not a pseudoscience either. I'm actually a mathematical realist which I believe is an unpopular opinion so I'm not saying mathematics is OK because it's a game, has pragmatic results, etc. but mathematics is much more epistemologically fundamental than the scientific method in the same way sense perception, logic, intuition, etc. are more fundamental and also valid forms of knowledge.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  15. #15
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    I can sense things which attest to the mind
    Sensory experiences do not indicate the mind; the mind indicates them.

    if we were all blind, that wouldn't make light not exist
    Of course not, but that's only because light is not a purely visual phenomenon.

    If you're not aware now, what are you? Would you allow me to do whatever I want to you, torture and use you in whichever way I wish like a machine or doll? At least become an epiphenomenalist for your own sake (I'm not an epiphenomenalist, but I find epiphenomenalism among people who don't think much about the philosophy of mind defensible.)
    Why are you saying this to me? I never claimed that I wasn't aware. And I think epiphenomalism is retarded.

  16. #16
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    Sensory experiences do not indicate the mind; the mind indicates them.

    Of course not, but that's only because light is not a purely visual phenomenon.

    Why are you saying this to me? I never claimed that I wasn't aware. And I think epiphenomalism is retarded.
    OK, imagine you are having no experiences and have never had any. Where's your mind now? There is no mind without sensory experiences. Sensory experiences are a part of the mind, not prior or posterior to it. If you remove them, everything else must also be removed. Since sensory experiences are part of mind, rather than simply an object or subject, all beings share some extent of really a universal mind embedded in matter (not subsisting on, not beyond,) which is how we do things like "communicate" and "interact." So, the part of my experience which attests to mind in myself also attests to mind in others. I can sense your thoughts even if you can't sense mine because of willful ignorance or what have you. Q.E.D.

    For an analogy: can you see shadows, can your hear silence? Yes, you can perceive the lack of a regular stimulus perfectly fine and even do scientific experiments on it. Mind is the same way. I don't have to be able to be like "and this is your soul I pulled out of your body" like in a campy horror movie to perceive mind with the senses.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  17. #17
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Now everyone hold on while I get my old fedora and contemplate whether it would go better on me or @Nunki.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  18. #18
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    OK, imagine you are having no experiences and have never had any. Where's your mind now?
    My mind doesn't and can't have a location, so the answer is, was, and always will be "nowhere."

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    There is no mind without sensory experiences.
    This is true.

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    Sensory experiences are a part of the mind,
    There is always a consciousness perceiving a given a sensory experience. But it isn't true to say that the two (a consciousness and its sensory experience) are equal to each other any more than it's true to say that a camera is equal to the picture it has taken.

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    Since sensory experiences are part of mind, rather than simply an object or subject, all beings share some extent of really a universal mind embedded in matter
    A mind can't be embedded in something.

    which is how we do things like "communicate" and "interact."
    If there were a universal mind, there would be no possibility of genuine communication.

    So, the part of my experience which attests to mind in myself also attests to mind in others.
    If you think it does, it does. But it doesn't necessarily.

    I can sense your thoughts even if you can't sense mine because of willful ignorance or what have you.
    If you say so.

  19. #19
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    My mind doesn't and can't have a location, so the answer is, was, and always will be "nowhere."

    This is true.

    There is always a consciousness perceiving a given a sensory experience. But it isn't true to say that the two (a consciousness and its sensory experience) are equal to each other any more than it's true to say that a camera is equal to the picture it has taken.

    A mind can't be embedded in something.

    If there were a universal mind, there would be no possibility of genuine communication.

    If you think it does, it does. But it doesn't necessarily.

    If you say so.
    I feel like this is such a horrible argument I can't address it. How do you know all minds are conscious, for example? You use the two interchangeably, but that's not a given. I actually don't think all minds are conscious at least all of the time, which is the basis for a lot of my highly unorthodox views on epistemology. You also shoo away the idea that mind can't have a location or be embedded in something without an explanation, which is my main reason for not addressing you, along with your "if you say so" in general. You seem to be relying on a Cartesian view of the mind right after I made a cogent argument against it, and are simply shooing away my argument for being unusual and making you uncomfortable. Now I must put my imaginary version of the fedora I had when I was a teenager on your head, so go off and feel enlightened by your own intelligence. You lost the battle, yet you won the fedora.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  20. #20
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    How do you know all minds are conscious, for example?
    I know this because the mind is consciousness reflecting on itself. A mind without consciousness is therefore meaningless, incoherent, inconceivable.

    I actually don't think all minds are conscious at least all of the time, which is the basis for a lot of my highly unorthodox views on epistemology.
    Then I think you must mean something different by the words than what I mean by them.

    You also shoo away the idea that mind can't have a location or be embedded in something without an explanation, which is my main reason for not addressing you, along with your "if you say so" in general.
    If the mind were located somewhere, we would have before us, where the mind should be, instead a sensory experience. The mind senses without itself being a sensed thing.

    You seem to be relying on a Cartesian
    I'm not a Cartesian except to the extent that my worldview acknowledges Cartesianism as being, like all positions, superficially true.

    shooing away my argument simply for being unusual.
    Your argument doesn't appear particularly unusual to me.

    You lost the battle, yet you won the fedora.
    Fedoras are really not my style, but thanks anyway.

  21. #21
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    I know this because the mind is consciousness reflecting on itself. A mind without consciousness is therefore meaningless, incoherent, inconceivable.

    Then I think you must mean something different by the words than what I mean by them.

    If the mind were located somewhere, we would have before us, where the mind should be, instead a sensory experience. The mind senses without itself being a sensed thing.

    I'm not a Cartesian except to the extent that my worldview acknowledges Cartesianism as being, like all positions, superficially true.

    Your argument doesn't appear particularly unusual to me.

    Fedoras are really not my style, but thanks anyway.
    Why do you believe mind is consciousness reflecting on itself? I think mind exists prior to reflection, yet you're just asserting otherwise. There's nothing obvious about considering the key trait of mind self-reflection. Please explain ideas like they're not a given and then I'll continue debating you. I don't mean different things. I think there's unconscious mind and unconscious thoughts, for example. I think animals are not quite completely unconscious, and consciousness can't exist without language. I even think animals are conscious to the exact degree they understand words and the same applies to humans, which can be quantified and abstracted from. I think minds are located where the objects of thoughts are rather than in brains as well, an idea based on phenomenology which finds support in phrases like "my mind wandered" and "I'm thinking about the big bang" (about the big bang is a locational phrase, meaning around the big bang where and when it happened.) Yet, all you do is sit and assert "bah humbug, ridiculous." My arguments are incredibly strange, but "bah humbug" does not win debates. If you sign up for a wrestling match, you don't win as soon as your opponent is revealed to be a mutant with four arms and three eyes, even if wrestling is fake.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  22. #22
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    Why do you believe mind is consciousness reflecting on itself?
    When I am conscious of my consciousness, what is that I am, in being so, conscious of? Some thing or things mental. And where else does the mind appear except there in that type of act? How could I conceive of my mind without reflecting on myself? How could I reflect on myself without conceiving of my mind as the very thing reflected upon?

    I think mind exists prior to reflection,
    Consciousness does, but not the mind. The mind is constituted by the act of self-reflection.

    There's nothing obvious about considering the key trait of mind self-reflection.
    Perception, of which reflection is a form, is the key trait of consciousness.

    I think there's unconscious mind and unconscious thoughts, for example.
    Unconscious mind or thought is an oxymoron.

    consciousness can't exist without language
    Language can't exist without consciousness.

  23. #23
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    When I am conscious of my consciousness, what is that I am, in being so, conscious of? Some thing or things mental. And where else does the mind appear except there in that type of act? How could I conceive of my mind without reflecting on myself? How could I reflect on myself without conceiving of my mind as the very thing reflected upon?

    Consciousness does, but not the mind. The mind is constituted by the act of self-reflection.

    Perception, of which reflection is a form, is the key trait of consciousness.

    Unconscious mind or thought is an oxymoron.

    Language can't exist without consciousness.
    Now you're simply asserting everything without the slightest reference to reality, unlike the vague hints of reality you've shown before. Saying "the mind is conscious of mental things" is the exact circular argument I consider to invalidate Cartesian dualism. The mind is conscious of itself when it is conscious, not of "mental things" which do not exist, and the mind is not aware of mental things, but of non-mental things (physical objects, places, etc.) Stating that mental things are in the mind and non-mental things are not creates a circular argument dividing the mind at least partially from reality without even defining what mental and non-mental things are, causing Cartesian insanity. Anyways, how are you on a socionics-based site without believing in the unconscious? I can imagine valid substitute explanations, but I need to hear a specific. Congratulations on losing a debate big time, and enjoy your fedora.
    Last edited by coeruleum; 12-06-2019 at 06:13 AM.
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  24. #24
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    Saying "the mind is conscious of mental things" is the exact circular argument I consider to invalidate Cartesian dualism.
    Those are not my words. I make a distinction between consciousness and the mind, which means that there is no circular argument involved.

    Anyways, how are you on a socionics-based site without believing in the unconscious?
    I don't know. I just am.

    I can imagine valid substitute explanations, but I need to hear a specific.
    I don't feel that anything I said requires a substitute explanation. If you do, you're more than welcome to provide one.

    Congratulations on losing a debate big time
    I wasn't aware that this was some kind of contest. I've been approaching it as a more or less casual conversation.

  25. #25
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    Those are not my words. I make a distinction between consciousness and the mind, which means that there is no circular argument involved.

    I don't know. I just am.

    I don't feel that anything I said requires a substitute explanation. If you do, you're more than welcome to provide one.

    I wasn't aware that this was some kind of contest. I've been approaching it as a more or less casual conversation.
    1. You define things as different, yet they end up the same. That's what a circular argument is. 2. I've already said I view it as a debate and the first adjective that comes to mind for you shooing away my ideas without addressing them is "violently."
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  26. #26
    a two horned unicorn renegade Heretic 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    Sol's emo club
    TIM
    ILE-C-I
    Posts
    4,844
    Mentioned
    209 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalinoche the Child View Post
    there are those who argue that even mathematics is not a science from an epistemology POV (as in the context is important)
    Mathematics is not a science I tell ya. It is a very extended circle jerk of some sort of absurd role game of rules.
    Measuring you right now

  27. #27
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    1. You define things as different, yet they end up the same.
    You haven't shown how that is the case. I would be most interested to see.

    I've already said I view it as a debate
    That's fine, but I don't.

    the first adjective that comes to mind for you shooing away my ideas without addressing them is "violently."
    If you feel that someone dismissing your ideas is an act of violence, you're probably a bit too attached to them.

  28. #28
    Taking flak and breaking glass coeruleum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Location
    Trumpistan
    TIM
    NFable
    Posts
    2,499
    Mentioned
    37 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nunki View Post
    You haven't shown how that is the case. I would be most interested to see.

    That's fine, but I don't.

    If you feel that someone dismissing your ideas is an act of violence, you're probably a bit too attached to them.
    1. I've already show it. Please ask for more specific clarification if you're not sure how.
    2. What do you view this as, winning someone who's studied to your neckbeard ideas?
    3. I view a jumping spider biting my finger as an act of violence because it is. Not all violence is threatening to me. The spider, however, is threatened by my mere proximity. You're not cute like a jumping spider, but the same applies. Anyways, being attached to ideas is a good thing if they're truths. Should I cut off my finger if a bug is threatened by it too?
    I am disappointed in humanity for not sending unsolicited nude pictures to aliens.
    We're all mad here.
     


  29. #29
    Psychic/Ghost Type
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    137
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coeruleum
    1. I've already show it. Please ask for more specific clarification if you're not sure how.
    I think you believe you've shown it. Do clarify if it suits your fancy.

    2. What do you view this as, winning someone who's studied to your neckbeard ideas?
    lol... I already said that I view it as a casual conversation. And I am far from a neckbeard. I am a petite, graceful, and highly adorable male of the highest caliber.

    3. I view a jumping spider biting my finger as an act of violence because it is. Not all violence is threatening to me. The spider, however, is threatened by my mere proximity. You're not cute like a jumping spider, but the same applies. [...] Should I cut off my finger if a bug is threatened by it too?
    First I was a neckbeard, now I'm a jumping spider. What is this strange alchemy?

    Anyways, being attached to ideas is a good thing if they're truths.
    How does being attached to an idea in your head do any good? Ideas don't accomplish a thing. Actions do.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •